07/28/2021 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS-MEETING MINUTES
WEDNESDAY, July 28, 2021
The public hearing was web-based on Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/2574297243
Meeting ID: 257 429 7243
I) CALL TO ORDER – Mr. Michelson called the meeting to order at 7:23 pm
Chair Antonio was not present. Motion made to appoint Mr. Michelson as acting Chair until Mr. Antonio’s arrival. Seconded by Mr. Freeman. Motion passed unanimously.
II) ROLL CALL
a) Appointment of Alternates :
• Present: Steven Antonio (arrived late), Ali Rice, Mark Freeman, Joshua Michelson, Ram Kaza, Sharon Thomas, Laura Barkowski
• Absent: Joann Hogan & Stacey Walczak
III) APPLICATIONS
a) Public Hearings
• Application #21-09 of Tom & Laura Nigro, Owners/Applicants for a variance pursuant to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 3.9 to allow a stairwell within the front yard setback at the property located at 41 Canal Street (Assessor’s Map F15, Block 115, and Lot 001). Zone R-15
Mr. Michelson tabled the application as no one was present to discuss.
• Application #21-10 of Freedom Property, LLC, c/o Luke Florian, Applicant, Iron Horse, LLC/ Owner for variances pursuant to the Simsbury Center Code Regulations Section 2.4.2G to allow parking, a carport and dumpster within the rear yard setback at the property located at 969 Hopmeadow Street (Assessor’s Map H08, Block 116, Lot 041). Zone SCZ
TJ Donahue and Luke Florian were present to discuss this application. Mr. Donahue discussed the background of the building and clarified that the intent is to convert this motel into a boutique apartment building. Mr. Florian discussed that he is a real estate investor and proposal is to convert the functionally obsolete motel use into an apartment building with 27 units. The proposal includes the removal of the pool, expansion of the parking area and the construction of a carport. In order to make the proposed renovations a variance would be needed to encroach into the rear yard setback. Mr. Donahue noticed that the abutting neighbor Seth Joseph was present and was invited to speak. Due to technical problems Mr. Joseph was unable to be heard so other members of the public were invited to speak.
Dr. Michel Williams of 965 Hopmeadow Street indicated he was interested in the details about the carports and the efficiencies that are being proposed and any additional details that can be provided.
Mr. Donahue clarified that the carports would be opposite the street. Mr. Florian indicated it would be a one story carport and that it is currently in the design phase. The project will have to go before the Design Review Board and need a Site Plan Approval. Dr. Williams voiced concern that a variance was being requested for a proposed structure with no details. Mr. Donahue replied that the variance was being requested for the placement only. It was inquired if Mr. Florian intended to reuse the primary structure. Mr. Florian indicated he intended to reuse as much as the primary structure as possible approximately 50% and he detailed to proposed floorplans.
At this time Chair Antonio joined the meeting..
Seth Joseph of 12 Oxford Court inquired if the retaining wall will be replacing the fence. Mr. Donahue confirmed. Mr. Joseph inquired how this would impact the view from his residence. Mr. Florian explained the proposal.
Mr. Freeman inquired if they intend to remove any trees. Mr. Florian responded likely not. Dr. Williams inquired if the proposal includes any additional plantings. Mr. Florian indicated that a landscape plan is being worked on. Additional inquiries were made about the lighting. Mr. Florian indicated new lighting would be proposed. Mr. Kaza inquired if the proposal included sufficient parking. Mr. Donahue stated that the project complies with the parking requirements. Mr. Antonio inquired about the lighting and if there would be spill over to the neighboring lots and the hours of illumination. Questions were posed about security measures and property management.
Mr. Antonio inquired if any landscape screening is being proposed. Mr. Florian indicated he would be happy to work with neighbors to provide screening if that is reqested. Ms. Thomas inquired as to the square footage as to each unit. Mr. Florian indicated the proposal is for efficiencies and one bedroom apartments. Mr. Joseph inquired as to the timeline of the project. Mr. Florian indicated he anticipates it to be a 12-16 month construction period.
Ms. Rice inquired as to the hardship. Mr. Donahue stated that the motel use currently in place for the building is functionally obsolete is the hardship and in order to make his investment financially viable the proposed renovations are needed. Further details were discussed about this being a rental apartment property.
Mr. Michelson inquired if the variance was denied would it still be able to provide adequate parking . Mr. Donahue clarified that the variance would be needed to meet the minimum parking standard. Mr. Antonio inquired about the functionality of a diagonal parking spaces and if alternatives have been considered. Ms. Rice inquired if the engineer could be brought in to discuss. Mr. Antonio made a motion to table the meeting until the regular scheduled meeting in August to discuss the plans with the engineer to validate the hardship. Seconded by Ms. Rice. Motion passed unanimously.
• Application #21-11 of Richard Fletcher, Owner/Applicant for a variance pursuant to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 3.5.1 to construct a 10’x 16’ shed within the front yard at the property located at 66 Pine Glen Road (Assessor’s Map D18, Block 208, and Lot 121). Zone R-40
Mr. Fletcher presented the application. He explained that he would like additional storage in form of a shed and due to the topography of the lot and that it is an irregular shape corner lot the desired location would require a variance. It was further discussed that this location is away from the wetlands on the property and minimalize the necessary site work. Additionally this location would enable him to keep the existing trees. Mr. Antonio clarified that if this wasn’t a corner lot the location of the shed would be allowed without a variance. Included in the application is a letter of support for the abutting neighbor. Public hearing was closed and deliberations ensued.
Mr. Antonio made a Motion to approve Application #21-11 of Richard Fletcher, Owner/Applicant for a variance pursuant to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 3.5.1 to construct a 10’x 16’ shed within the front yard at the property located at 66 Pine Glen Road with the hardship being the topography, elevations of the parcel and the setback requirements of the double front yard being an undue burden upon the applicant. Ms. Thomas seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
• Application #21-09 of Tom & Laura Nigro, Owners/Applicants for a variance pursuant to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 3.9 to allow a stairwell within the front yard setback at the property located at 41 Canal Street (Assessor’s Map F15, Block 115, and Lot 001). Zone R-15
The Public Hearing was opened. No representatives were present to discuss the application. No comment from public. Mr. Antonio discussed the application for a stairwell within the front yard setback as a second egress. It was clarified that house is located within the front yard setback and any work done would have to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Antonio made a motion to approve Application #21-09 of Tom & Laura Nigro, Owners/Applicants for a variance pursuant to the Simsbury Zoning Regulations Section 3.9 to allow a stairwell within the front yard setback at the property located at 41 Canal Street. This is listed as two family residences however it currently has only one form of egress and it requires additional egress for safety purposes. The stated hardship is that any additions built onto the structure would require a variance due to the location of the building on the lot. Motion was seconded by Mr. Freeman. Motion passed unanimously.
IV) APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the WEDNESDAY June 23, 2021 regular meeting.
The minutes were tabled to the next regular scheduled meeting.
V) ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Antonio made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Freeman seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:23 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Laura Barkowski
Acting Commission Clerk